On 2005/06/07, at 21:23, Phil Enns wrote: > Julie's confusion lies in equating 'power' with what the > individuals are > physically able to do. Phil's blowing smoke consists of (1) equating power with legal authority and (2) insisting that "right" has no meaning different from power in this sense. Like Tweedledee and Tweedledum he can make his words mean whatever he chooses. He must, however, IMHO produce an account of revolutions in which revolutionaries are not legally empowered to make the demands for whose sake they overturn a regime, yet, nonetheless, appeal to their "right" to do so and achieve their objectives without the exercise of "power" in clearly extralegal senses. John McCreery ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html